[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

must make it doubly-tough on folks like Dave at SGC and Joe Orlando at PSA because they have to weigh turning down grading cards versus trying to book revenue. Although I guess if a trimmed card is submitted and detected, they are getting paid still. I would 'assume' (you know what happens there) that they keep such numbers in some type of database. I'd think that based on the slips that at least SGC sends back where they check off the type of alteration, they should be able to give some statistics on what % of cards are coming in altered....from those, what the most prevalent alterations are, from those or from the altered cards, how many are being slabbed under the 'A' monicker.....but I'm sure that type of information would never be disclosed. Transparency is part of the problem you've tried to address with them.......

I know Rob Lifson sent that email about the card from an auction being resubmitted. I'd think it would be difficult for someone in the auction world to turn down an already graded card for auctioning that they thought had been altered in some way. Hopefully they have a good enough dialog that they work together on those issues.